.

Holt Ad Targets Climate Change

Rush Holt and Cory Booker released ads playing to their respective strengths on Monday.

U.S. Rep. Rush Holt in his latest web ad, released Monday.
U.S. Rep. Rush Holt in his latest web ad, released Monday.

Two of the Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate on Monday released ads in separate bids to become New Jersey’s junior Senator.

U.S. Rep. Rush Holt (D-12) released “Climate Change,’’ the latest in a series of one-minute web ads touting progressive causes. And Newark Mayor Cory Booker released a 30-second television spot, titled "People,'' playing up Booker’s commitment to bringing people together for Democratic causes.

“No matter what your background -- race, culture, gay or straight; North Jersey, South Jersey, rich or poor -- our lives are interconnected,” Booker says in the ad. “We cannot have policies that divide instead of bringing us together.”

Booker then pledges to support Democratic causes like combating child poverty, protecting Medicare and Social Security from cuts, achieving equal pay for equal work, raising the minimum wage and encouraging American innovation and competitiveness.

In his ad, Holt says it is time to stop denying the existence of climate changes and that humans are responsible for it.

“We can no longer let Republicans deny obvious truths,’’ Holt says. “Our climate is changing. The consequences are lethal. Humans are responsible. And, America must act.”

Holt proposes a carbon tax assessed on industries that “are dumping gasses into our atmosphere,’’ with the money raised to go into research for alternative energy. 

If we don’t act?

Sea levels will rise. Storms like Sandy will become more frequent, he says.

“Entire swaths of the planet will become unfit for human habitation. Millions will  die,” Holt says. “That’s science. That’s reality.’’

The pair of contenders represent one-half of the field vying for the Democratic nomination to run for the U.S. Senate seat left by the late Frank Lautenberg. U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-6) and state Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-34) also are running in the Aug. 13 primary election.

The winner of that election will face off against one of the two GOP candidates – former Bogota Mayor Steve Lonegan or Somerset County physician Alieta Eck -- in a special Senate election on Oct. 13.

V July 22, 2013 at 01:12 PM
Does anyone really care about this voodoo crap? Why do people believe in this climate change / global warming nonsense- Where were humans when the ice age occurred and then receded - did dinosaurs and then cavemen cause this? No! The earth has been around how many billions of years and will go thru cycles regardless of what humans do so can we stop wasting time on this? there are more importnant economic growth issues to deal with
c July 22, 2013 at 01:49 PM
Just another socialist looking for more ways to tax the little people that are still working.
Michael Megill July 22, 2013 at 03:36 PM
“Entire swaths of the planet will become unfit for human habitation. Millions will die,” Holt says. “That’s science. That’s reality.’’ Ha! - the Republicans are killing the planet. As the Democrats killed Detroit I suppose. Please, Congressman Holt, please address our economic woes. Those will certainly destroy our country long before any significant climate change will make our planet unihabitable. Though I suppose we can hedge and buy futures in privately run space shuttles. Oh no, but only the rich and politicians will be able to afford that, going to have to make those available to everyone too. The "Affordable Space Shuttle Act" or "HoltCare". But the politicians will not be subject to the act and have access to the very best Space Shuttles. The rest of us will have to wait in line for seats on the Shuttles only available through federally mandated exchanges.
Rocket J. Squirrel July 22, 2013 at 05:22 PM
"Climate Change". i still miss "Global Warming". At least it was a declaratory title.
jeff goldstein July 23, 2013 at 11:58 AM
I still remember when a lot of the same people who pushed the idea of climate change or global warming promoted the idea of nuclear winter. In spite of that if you agree with the idea of global warming you have to realize that none of what Holt is promoting will make any difference. Without China making major changes to its energy use all of the proposed restrictions on carbon based fuels in the US would be insignificant. Holt would put the US in an economically disadvantaged position with no benefit.
Kenny J. July 23, 2013 at 12:10 PM
LOL republicans are so short sighted that is why they can't even comprehend that the devastating pollution of our planet is affecting the weather and environment. They aren't scientists. They are joe plumber and susie homemaker still asleep believing the American dream is real, and that corporate polluters and corporate welfare will get them rich. These are the same people who don't give a crap about anyone but themselves. Just look at the tin foil hats touting the same old arguments that clearly haven't worked for them. Keep chasing them carrots, republicans.
c July 23, 2013 at 01:40 PM
What color Cool-Aide did you sip when you woke up at 11:30 Ken?
Rocket J. Squirrel July 23, 2013 at 03:27 PM
Jeff--I think you meant the mini ice age. That was the fear in the 80s when we were kids. Nuclear Winter is a reality if nukes are ever dropped en masse which, I fear they will someday. Kenny--I suppose you ARE a scientist? I certainly am not, however, I learned in grade school that the Earth is over 5 billion years old. Until they have the capability to track temperature changes precisely since the birth of the planet, any prognostication as to causes of temperature change are about as reliable as my predictions on who will win the NL East in 2023.
g July 23, 2013 at 07:20 PM
By Alan Caruba (Bio and Archives) Sunday, June 16, 2013 While the nation tries to come to grips with the cascade of scandals involving the Obama administration, a significant phenomenon has been occurring. It is the demise of the global warming/climate change hoax that has driven national and international policies since the 1980s. Directed from within the bowels of the most corrupt international organization on planet Earth, the United Nations, the hoax originally generated the Kyoto Protocols in December 1997 to set limits on the generation of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. The UN’s climate charlatans claimed that CO2 was causing the Earth to dramatically warm. It was a lie. The U.S. Senate unanimously refused to ratify it and, in 2011, Canada withdrew from it.
g July 23, 2013 at 07:41 PM
Al Gore wrote "An Inconvenient Truth" Al Gores academic credentials: In his sophomore year at Harvard, Gore's grades were lower than any semester recorded on Bush's transcript from Yale. That was the year Gore's classmates remember him spending a notable amount of time in the Dunster House basement lounge shooting pool, watching television, eating hamburgers and occasionally smoking marijuana. His grades temporarily reflected his mildly experimental mood, and alarmed his parents. He received one D, one C-minus, two C's, two C-pluses and one B-minus, an effort that placed him in the lower fifth of the class for the second year in a row. For all of Gore's later fascination with science and technology, he often struggled academically in those subjects. The political champion of the natural world received that sophomore D in Natural Sciences 6 (Man's Place in Nature) and then got a C-plus in Natural Sciences 118 his senior year.
Donald July 23, 2013 at 10:29 PM
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), which is widely acknowledged and respected as the intellectual and policy equivalent of the Congressional Budget Office -- that is, impartial and authoritative -- in matters of science, both climate change AND global warming are now virtually certain to be largely caused by human-induced forces, especially the modern production of so-called greenhouse gasses. The foregoing conclusions were provided in detailed reports prepared at the request of Congress several years ago, and have been reaffirmed since then, including that we are indeed facing an existential threat. The NAS includes the very best minds in science and engineering, including many scores of Nobel Prize winners. NAS also has conducted surveys among reputable scientists, concluding that some 97% agree with the foregoing conclusions. Indeed, virtually EVERY respected and respectable scientific organization -- such as the American Meteorological Society, the AAAS, NASA, the American Physical Society, the American Chemical Society, as well as many scores of others, worldwide -- studying the matter has issued statements supporting the detailed and thorough studies of NAS, after performing their own independent reviews of the research. Yale University has been reporting on the near-consensus now reached among scientists, as well as vocal dissent broadcast by a minority of deniers. Yes, there are some outliers out there -- as for most things. However, many (e.g., the Heartland Institute) have hidden, financial and/or political agendas (beyond the scope of this post). But the fact remains that virtually every well-credentialed and widely respected scientific organization -- relying on PEER-REVIEWED research -- opining on this existential issue has reached the same conclusions as the preeminent NAS, as reported by Yale University. BTW, I am a trained engineer, who -- before I retired -- was paid $1,000 per hour by a major petrochemical company as an outside expert.
g July 24, 2013 at 09:51 AM
Who do you believe? Al Gore with his academic credentials or Donald who says he is an expert on global warming? Decisions, decisions.
Kenny J. July 24, 2013 at 10:02 AM
The demonstration of the willful scientific illiteracy in the article's comment section alone is an appalling show of how the conservative media has brainwashed republican associated Americans into pure stupidity. Just take a look at Rocket Squirrel's assertion that unles 5 BILLION years of climate data can be supplied she will not 'believe' in human caused climate change. Firstly, that data will never be available because it simply does not exist. Secondly, she like all of the rest of the scientifically incompetent does not research for herself that ice cores drilled at various locations at the polar caps has produced 800,000 years of data with the potential of up to 1.5 million years. With the oscillations of climate estimated to be 40,000 years, that provided up to 20 cycles worth of data. That is plenty of data to show that humans are causing a multiplicative effect. I mean ask yourself honestly - with the millions of automobiles, planes, trains, factories, and plants producing megatons of carbon and assaulting the atmosphere do you really think this would have no effect on our only home? Of course that's what you think because your political leaders who have perfected the art of shoving their heads up corporate asses want you to think. And they've done a great job. Human caused global warming/climate change rifts is largely caused by business, and its denail is nothing but a propaganda line spearheaded by their lobbying efforts to make sure you think it's a hoax. Congratulations. You are now officially a conspiracy theorist. But it's not to late. You can choose to research why climate change is very real and why 97% of scientists have the real data to back up the claim, and find out why climate change deniers are lambasted for wearing a tin foil hat, usually while taking a corporate handout for being a sellout to talk controversy to the public. BTW I am an engineer who has worked in nuclear, mechanical, electrical, and computer science who has worked for government, public, and private sector who also has experience in publicly traded futures agro commodities based on predicative weather patterns and full scale global weather affected market scenarios. The science is there. Climate change is cyclical and very real. So is the devastation humans have caused to the full scale atmosphere of the planet by polluting it with mega-tons of carbon and other elements. To think we could pollute the air and water and earth on the scale we do and think it would have no effect is completely ignorant of what we are doing to our planet as to render you a useless automaton sitting on in front of your TV just repeating what FOX noise tells you to think. This type of locust behavior and group think will be the cause of the downfall of the country you claim to love so much. YOU are the reason this country is failing based on lazy stupidity. The beauty of science is its not about what you 'believe'. I don't 'believe' in global warming/climate change. I accept the findings of climate scientists as true based on the (overwhelming amount of) evidence to support the claims and assertions.
g July 24, 2013 at 10:30 AM
Kenny J states, I don't 'believe' in global warming/climate change. I accept the findings of climate scientists as true based on the (overwhelming amount of) evidence to support the claims and assertions. EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE FRAUD OF SCIENTIFIC EXPERTS: It is Obama and the other global warming alarmists who, like “flat earthers,” are in denial of reality. The doctrine of human-caused global warming, via carbon dioxide emissions, has already been thoroughly discredited by science. Denying the science or falsifying it cannot change the truth, but that is what has been done for political reasons. Last month, in a disclosure that drew wide publicity and ominous warnings, it was announced that atmospheric carbon dioxide measurements had reached 400 parts per million and that this was the highest in 3 million years. But as we pointed out there is abundant evidence that this is not true. Between the years 1812 and 1961, there were 90,000(!) measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide published in 175 technical papers. These show five-year averages of 440 ppm CO2 in 1820 and 1940. Professor Jaworowski says these measurements were ignored “not because they were wrong. Indeed, these measurements were made by top scientists, including two Nobel Prize winners, using techniques that are standard textbook procedures….The only reason for rejection was that these measurements did not fit the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming. I regard this as perhaps the greatest scientific scandal of our time.”
Rocket J. Squirrel July 24, 2013 at 10:47 AM
So Kenny--your a commodities trader? I assume you're shorting oil?
Rocket J. Squirrel July 24, 2013 at 10:49 AM
"I don't 'believe' in global warming/climate change. I accept the findings of climate scientists as true based on the (overwhelming amount of) evidence to support the claims and assertions." This reliance argument on selected scientific research is about as compelling as the argument that "climate change deniers" are flat earthers as, at one time, the prevailing scientific sata reflected the existence of a continental shelf off of which you would fall. What other scientific certitudes have been disproven in the last 100 years, and how many will be disproven in the next?
g July 24, 2013 at 11:16 AM
U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995 By Jonathan Petre Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing There has been no global warming since 1995 Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes Data: Professor Phil Jones admitted his record keeping is 'not as good as it should be' The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information. Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers. Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’. The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory. Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon. And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming. The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made. Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit after the leaking of emails that sceptics claim show scientists were manipulating data. The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
Rocket J. Squirrel July 24, 2013 at 02:16 PM
For all the conspiracy theorists claiming there's a pecuniary interest in certain interested parties to "deny" "climate change", there's just as much pecuniary interest in propagating it. See "clean" energy proliferation, etc. It's a battle of the experts and everyone;s expert is bought and paid for.
Donald July 24, 2013 at 02:58 PM
One needn't believe ANYONE posting here. Instead, believe the almost universal majority of scientists who have reached a consensus on the issue of human-induced climate change. According to the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, THE most respected body of impartial scientists in the country: "The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society....The pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now." To read first-hand the consensus of our nation's best and brightest scientific minds, merely Google: "National Academy of Sciences" "climate change". The LONG list of SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATIONS -- not politicians or singular outliers -- in agreement with the NAS include: The American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Chemical Society, the American Institute of Physicists, the American Meteorological Society, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Physical Society, and the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (as well as the overwhelming majority of Nobel Prize winners). Merely Google any of the foregoing organizations and "climate change" to review their conclusions and detailed statements on the issue. In sum, there is no meaningful "battle of experts." There is a near consensus of experts, as found by Yale University's Project on Climate Change Communication, as recently as May 29, 2013: "97% of climate scientists agree that global warming is happening and human caused, at least in part." Note also that these scientists agree that "GLOBAL WARMING" is indeed occurring, even though deniers keep repeating the falsehood that the scientific community has retreated from that conclusion. To see Yale's actual statements, Google "Yale Project on Climate Change Communication."
jeff goldstein July 24, 2013 at 03:34 PM
Science depends on provable facts not a "consensus of experts." It is totally irrelevant that groups like the American Chemical Society believe that global warming exists and it is caused by man. They are not climatologists. Recently climatologist's have noticed cooling trends based on the 90 and 200 year solar cycles. It appears that we have much more to fear that decreased solar activity will cause temperatures around the globe to decrease. A article in Forbes ( http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/05/26/to-the-horror-of-global-warming-alarmists-global-cooling-is-here/ ) documents this trend.
Donald July 24, 2013 at 03:51 PM
A few final points: 1. To dismiss ALL scientists -- especially the many, many thousands who have reached consensus-- as simply biased or venal or irrelevant, is merely another manifestation of being "anti-science." It is also generally insulting and cynical of human achievement and the advancement of mankind. 2. Many of the arguments made by climate-change deniers are reminiscent of those who resisted the overwhelming consensus in the medical community that tobacco and smoking caused cancer. Indeed, some of the very same folks are now involved in denying climate change. One such organization is the Heartland Institute and its employees/members, which Forbes and other non-science publications often cite. 3. The predictions of climate scientists of decades ago are now being borne out. For example, the increased thermal energy being retained by the earth's oceans and atmosphere have in fact resulted in evermore frequent and more extreme weather anomalies, way beyond those explainable by the mere variability of weather and naturally occurring shifts in climate (which take tens of thousands of years to manifest themselves). So even though scientists have developed ways to collect data about the earth's weather hundreds of thousands of years in the past, there is no need to go back millions of years. The present climate data and correlations to greenhouse-gas emissions is so strong and predictable that there is now a consensus among experts that we have reached the point where a clear and present danger exists. This is also why several of the most prominent and respected bodies of mathematicians -- e.g., the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics -- have also weighed in on the existence of human-induced climate change. They, as well as the climate scientists, have accepted the "provable facts," just as modern scientists have accepted evolution, notwithstanding a few deniers claiming evolution lacks "provable facts."
Donald July 24, 2013 at 03:59 PM
For some above who apparently may have missed Yale's most recent finding about the conclusions of CLIMATOLOGISTS, I repeat the May 29, 2013, statement by Yale University's center that specializes in the area: "97% of climate scientists agree that global warming is happening and human caused, at least in part."
Rocket J. Squirrel July 25, 2013 at 12:21 PM
Claim: "97% of climate scientists agree that global warming is happening and human caused, at least in part" Reality: 97% of scientists having peer-reviewed papers claiming that global warming is happening and human caused, at least in part, agree that global warming is happening and human caused, at least in part. Who do you think controls publication decisions and peer-review? Moreover, what is the boundary of "at least in part". Is it "a little". Is it " lotsa" or is it "we have no idea.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something